President Donald Trump issued a sweeping pardon on Monday that includes his former personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and dozens of others tied to efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
In a proclamation dated Nov. 7, Trump said the action would end “a grave national injustice perpetrated upon the American people following the 2020 presidential election and continue the process of national reconciliation.”
“These great Americans were persecuted and put through hell by the Biden Administration for challenging an election, which is the cornerstone of democracy,” said White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt in a statement.
Broad Clemency, Limited Legal Impact
Giuliani is among more than 70 individuals included in the pardon list, such as former chief of staff Mark Meadows, attorney Sidney Powell and law professor John Eastman. While the pardons are “full, complete and unconditional,” they apply only to federal offences—and none of the people named were federal-charged in the election-subversion probe.
“This proclamation ends a grave national injustice,” the document states. Legal experts say the practical impact may be largely symbolic, as many of the prosecutions against the pardoned were at state level—where presidential clemency does not reach.
Giuliani has faced a series of professional and legal setbacks, including disbarment in New York and Washington, D.C. for his election-fraud related activities, and a multimonial liability case in Georgia for defamation. In response to the pardon, his spokesperson, Ted Goodman, said: “Mayor Giuliani never sought a pardon but is deeply grateful for President Trump’s decision.” Goodman added that Giuliani “stands by his work following the 2020 presidential election.”
Observers note this pardon campaign reinforces Trump’s narrative about the 2020 election loss. As Reuters reported: “the move would end ‘a grave national injustice’ and ‘continue the process of national reconciliation.’” Some critics warn the action “sends a dangerous message for future elections.”
While supporters see the move as correcting what they view as political prosecutions, opponents argue it undermines the rule of law by excusing the attempt to overturn a presidential election.
Although the pardons remove federal jeopardy, they do not shield the individuals from state prosecutions. For instance, cases in Georgia, Michigan and Arizona remain active. The document explicitly states it “does not apply to the president of the United States,” sidestepping the question of self-pardon by Trump.